Archive for March, 2010

This is not just M&S food… it’s all the other brands too!

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

Strange scenes in the food hall at Cambridge’s Marks & Sparks today. Having spent a morning in the Fitzwilliam museum, I ambled over to the holy land of supermarket food in order to retrieve a pasta salad of inimitable delectability.

Having just plucked said pasta from its haven in the chiller cabinet, I glanced down to peruse the selection of crisps which were being purveyed by the purveyors, at which point, I was met with a curious sight. Where a selection of crisps made by M&S would once have sat, a pile of Walkers crisps now resided.

Seeing as M&S only sells food made by itself, and used to advertise them with the infamous ‘food porn’ ads, this was a little interesting. I turned round to find a whole stack of two litre diet coke bottles, and a sign stating that M&S had ‘made room’ for some of our favourite brands.

There was a rumour that even KitKats could be obtained if one looked in the right places. But, the most insulting part of all, is that nobody could find any Percy Pigs near to the queue, where one normally finds them. They have certainly not gone altogether, but this is a distressing set of developments for M&S purists.

What are M&S up to? I can’t see this one working out. This is not just a mistake… it’s an M&S unethically-sourced and completely unneeded mistake.

No going back now

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

A couple of blog posts back, I wrote an article about my beloved Ipswich Town Football Club. Speculation is rife that our manager, Roy Keane, is to be replaced. I think this would be a bad idea.

I rarely venture beyond this here blog and my Twitter page to publish anything. People that write on oft-frequented online publications are apt to receive a load of comments below their articles, a good deal of which will disagree in an unnecessarily insulting manner.

I thought I’d make an exception, and venture out of my safety bubble. I got in touch with the content editor of Ipswich Town’s successful fanzine, Those Were The Days (a.k.a. TWTD), and that article is now available on their website.

At this point, the ignorance and naivety of my opinions will now be brutally exposed by ruthless comment-leavers. At any rate, it’s just nice to be out there talking about the Super Blues, who I love dearly.

To see the article on the site, go right here: http://www.twtd.co.uk/news.php?storyid=16238.

An interesting night out after a normal night out (Or, ‘Fire at Spillers Mill’)

Monday, March 29th, 2010

On Friday evening, some PGCE accomplices of mine frequented the watering holes of Cambridge’s bustling metropolis, culminating in entry to one of the local discotheques. There was nothing extraordinary about this at all – the night was perfectly normal. A few drinks spent in the company of a few good people, followed by a boogie.

What happened after was more interesting.

I had completed the most part of my amble homewards. In fact, I was just heading over the railway bridge on Mill Road which joins Petersfield and Romsey in blissful union. Although this was unexeptional, what I witnessed upon glancing to the right was far from normal.

A few hundred metres away, beyond the railway station itself, stood a large building. It was on fire.

As it emerged, this was no small fire either. I could already see it from quite a distance, with embers flying into the air at an impressive rate, billowing out of the building’s peak.

Instead of finishing the journey home, I diverted myself to the environs of the building. In the five minutes it took to get there, the fire had seemed to increase in severity. The area was populated by firemen, and I clambered onto a nearby brick wall to get a view over the large metal fence which presumably failed to prevent some arsonists from setting the place alight. A few people had already done the same thing, and had climbed into a more central, albeit difficult to reach, viewing platform.

Spillers Mill, on fire, from nearby

Spillers Mill, on fire, from nearby. Shoddy picture quality, because I only had my mobile phone to take the picture with.

My view got boring, so I headed for the Hills Road railway bridge, a minute or two from my beloved Homerton College. The view from the bridge gave more confirmation that several parts of the building were alight. The fire was raging, and the one hose pointed at the building’s top floor seemed too punitive to prevent the flames from spreading. You could see the glow of the blaze through every empty window on the site.

Spillers Mill on fire, as viewed from Hills Road railway bridge. Again, taken with a mobile phone, so poor quality.

Spillers Mill on fire, as viewed from Hills Road railway bridge. Again, taken with a mobile phone, so poor quality.

Anticipating that I should head home, but still desiring another view, I headed to the industrial park adjacent to Rustat Road. Deep within the industrial park, which had thus far appeared to be completely deserted, I saw a new Mini parked up, blaring out the music of the Kings Of Leon.

Mindful of what I might be disturbing, I tentatively headed closer to it. Nearby, I saw a girl atop a stack of tyres. She turned and spoke to someone out of vision. Quoth her: “Er, there’s someone else here”.  Bemused, I thought I’d join their impromptu gathering.

Twas a man and a woman, probably three or four years younger than myself. The woman had a beefy SLR camera, and mentioned that the guy she was with was a relative stranger to her. They had been at a party nearby until they realised this building was on fire, which clearly required their attention. They were both very friendly, and we engaged in smalltalk, observing the spectacle as one might a fireworks display.

At some point, I slipped on my new position atop the pile of rubber tyres, and pierced my hand on some barbed wire. Not too badly though; the bleeding soon stopped, but the cut was slightly deeper than your average laceration. At any rate, the girl announced to me that they were about to take some of this “methadrone” stuff, and asked if I took it. I replied with a negative, for I do not.

It appeared to be something they snorted. I don’t know an awful lot about it. The girl turned to me and asked “are you going to judge us for this?”. I said “no”, as I imagine there are far more heinous or harmful things to be doing with one’s time, even if taking methadrone isn’t such a wonderful idea.

With that they were off, and I decided it was time for bed, and I headed home. Five minutes later, I had crossed Mill Road, and was nearly back in my bedroom armed with a bowl of post-night-out Weetabix, reflecting on the bizarre spectacle which I had beheld.

The building itself is, or perhaps was, known as Spiller’s Mill. Standing several storeys high, it used to consist of an original mill building dating from 1894, with some large modern appendages. The additions did not feature the historic materials of the initial building, and looked like a series of cheap bolt-ons. At some point in the last decade, the ugly new bits were removed, with the intention of converting the old building into flats.

I don’t know if this plan was abandoned or not. Certainly the area has been a building site for some time, though whether things have been happening on it, I cannot say. I would imagine people who live in close proximity to the building know the answer to this mystery.

Now Spillers Mill risks collapse due to the structural damage caused by the blaze. I had maintained, and observed to my Mum at some point during one of her recent visits to the city, that I felt Spillers Mill to be one of the finest buildings in Cambridge. It dominates the skyline around it, and I felt it to be a great shame that it couldn’t be used for something else.

Now, I suppose, the chances of that happening have been greatly diminished, and the building may have been lost forever. This is to the detriment of the city, I think. Reminders of England’s industrial heritage often combine beauty with the fact that the building was highly functional. I wonder what fate awaits for Spillers Mill.

Keane out, Curbishley in? I hope not.

Saturday, March 27th, 2010

Alan Curbishley has reportedly attended two recent Ipswich Town games, which is worrying. Sure, ‘Curbs’ is a manager with a strong reputation and an equally impressive CV, but Ipswich already have a tremendous manager in Roy Keane. Although we don’t have to worry that Marcus Evans has been reading Flavio Briatore’s ten-step guide to running a football club, replacing Keano would still be a poor move at this point. At Portman Road, no-one is hastily sacked. Getting rid of Keane would be the worst imaginable violation of this trend.

If talks are indeed taking place, it will be the first time that the owners have demonstrated a palpable naivety in their long-term plans for the club. Admittedly, it has not been a tremendous season for Ipswich; we all know this. However, it has been far from desperate. What Town need is a bit of tweaking, not major change. We’ve not been outclassed by the whole division. We just need to stop the late goals going in and convert a couple more of our chances per game, that is all.

The unlucky start to the season could easily have developed into a full-on disaster, but Roy Keane’s inspirational leadership ensured that it did not. His every statement to the press was calculated by him so that the players wouldn’t lose confidence. By accepting the responsibility himself, and admitting that his job could be on the line, he eased the pressure on the team. Many managers let this pressure mount to a level where winning games becomes near impossible. Roy Keane did not.

As it happens, we’re not likely to do a Norwich. We shouldn’t have to drop a division to play against teams we can beat. Another win should do it, and then we can look forward to next season, when Keane’s vision for Town will hopefully blossom into something more deadly for opposition defences.

This is exactly why the Town fans and management have to be extremely careful. Constant speculation about Keane’s future may well drive him away from our club. We do not want this. In recent years, there have been players who don’t seem too fussed about winning points for our team. Roy Keane is exactly the man to sort this out – anyone slacking will be kicked quickly and powerfully up the backside and may well find themselves landing somewhere near Carrow Road. He seems to care about our club, and won’t accept mediocrity or failure. Let’s remember this before we send him a P45 form, or force him to ask for it anyway.

Okay, very funny, now own up

Saturday, March 27th, 2010

From time to time, I go to Google Analytics to look at the data generated from visits to my site. In fact, I blogged about this some months ago. One of the most enlightening things you can use Google Analytics for is to display the search terms which have been used to access your result.

Hence, if you google “Olly Fayers”, I come up first. If you click through to this website, the stats will show me that a search for “Olly Fayers” got the user to the site.

However, someone has now used this to play a joke on me, and quite an amusing one at that. Recently a photo of me amongst other Green Party campaigners in Cambridge found itself to page 5 of the Cambridge News. I would imagine that the person who searched for, wait for it, “olly fayers fit cambridge news attractive”, would not seriously give those attributes to me. Nonetheless, good joke. I did chuckle.

In related news, people are still searching for Alexsandr Meerkat and “don’t even sound same” and finding their way here. Quite a few people actually, which is weird. I only really wrote the one post about it, and twas not even that good.

Meanwhile, a old friend of mine from uni (who goes by the name ‘Andy’) appears to have searched for “andy olly fayers powerhouse”, to hark back to the time we used the word “powerhouse” with liberal frequency to describe people with significant intellectual clout, or to wind other people up by calling ourselves powerhouses and denying others that status. Good work.

People are also searching for “lobster card”, which is what I call my Oyster card. One person searched for “who is Simon Fayers”, and I’m afraid I do not know.

Me and my big mouth (I regret nothing)

Saturday, March 27th, 2010
Me and my big mouth (I regret nothing)
I think that the title of this blog post would lend itself well to the name of an album track for Pink Floyd, or to the name of a piece of godawful conceptual art.
I’m writing to tell you of a going-on which I endured about a month ago. I didn’t write about this event when it happened; in my mind was a strong image of my dearest mother rolling her eyes at the latest minor pickle which I had gotten myself into. But, as is tradition on my blog, I’ll update you with the details of an event about which you presumably care little.
I was sat on a train heading towards Hitchin from London King’s Cross after a night in Shepherd’s Bush at the War On Want Comedy Gig 2010. For several reasons, the topic of conversation between my friends and I had moved on to the merits of Stevenage.
When I say ‘merits’, of course I mean ‘lack of any remote trace of a morsel of a merit’. Stevenage is patently awful.
Consider the town centre, which seems somehow more befitting of Airstrip One (England in Nineteen Eighty-Four) than Hertfordshire. It is dominated by a clock of wince-inducing ugliness. Next to this is a fountain, which made gave the vicinity a potent smell of ‘eau de public swimming pool’. Nearby are some public toilets, the closer to which one gets, the more one starts to crave the miraculously more pleasant smell of the chlorine.
Elsewhere in the town are plenty o’ sixties tower blocks, and several estates where each house looks more or less identical. This is owing to the fact that Stevenage new town, of which I am talking, was built mostly after WWII on a large scale. Stevenage old town cannot, thankfully, be tarred with the same brush as it’s younger and more brutish brother.
A long walk around the new town gives one a feel of a large social experiment which plainly failed. It’s bizarre.
Anyhow, to return to the train conversation. I was unwisely critiquing Stevenage on a train which passed through Stevenage. Thus, people local to Stevenage were in nearby seats. My words were significantly less stinging than those written here, and were more balanced about the strange feel which a new town has. (That said, I may possibly have referred to it as hell, by stating that if hell turned out to be on Earth, it can only be Stevenage. The truth is that it’s more like purgatory).
I contrasted it favourably to Milton Keynes at least, which is a town of such ugliness that you might find yourself reaching for nearby rusty cutlery with which to gouge out your eyes and thus prevent you from witnessing its ugliness ever again.
I also noted the quite odd, but not bad, cycle lanes which you find around the city. They go over and under roads, meaning it should be easy to get from A to B with pedal power.
Following my balanced summary of the delights of Stevenage (okay, my tongue is currently in cheek), I noted to my comrades that I should have maybe considered that nearby persons might overhear and object to my verdict.
This last point proved as accurate as my ones about Stevenage’s ugliness – as a woman got up to leave the train, and angrily barked at me “have you ever lived in Stevenage?”. I said ‘no’, for I had not. I don’t remember what she said next, but she was presumably going to question the validity of my opinion as I had never resided there.
Before she left, she justified to a co-traveller of hers – “Sorry, I was just really offended by what I heard”.
I now offer a few points of response to the mystery angry female resident of Stevenage.
Are you seriously implying that you have to live somewhere to pass judgement on whether it looks nice or not? That is imbecilic.
Have you considered that you are angry because you live in Stevenage? I’d be angry.
If you’d have seen the sympathetic glances I received from fellow travellers, and a comment about your rudeness from one of them, you might consider that you had been more unreasonable than I.
I’m from Ipswich. I know what it’s like to hear people criticising a town which I love. It’s just others’ opinions on something inconsequential. It doesn’t matter. Let it go.
Even though I take great amusement in pretending that my own worthless opinions are in fact the most important proclamations of truth which a human ear would ever receive, I’m not so arrogant to think that people should share an opinion of mine about a place I have no attachment to.
As well as Ipswich, people often cite the ugliness of the University of York. Like Stevenage, if you’re not a fan of sixties architecture, you ain’t gonna like it. But I have personal attachments to the U of Y, and I love the place. But I don’t get annoyed if people describe it as hideous. I can reflect on it enough to see where they’re coming from.
But no, not mystery angry female resident of Stevenage (MAFRoS). MAFRoS simply descends into blind fury that someone’s opinion of her hometown could feasibly differ from her own.

Me and my big mouth (I regret nothing)

I think that the title of this blog post would lend itself well to the name of an album track for Pink Floyd, or to the name of a piece of godawful conceptual art.

I’m writing to tell you of a going-on which I endured about a month ago. I didn’t write about this event when it happened; in my mind was a strong image of my dearest mother rolling her eyes at the latest minor pickle which I had gotten myself into. But, as is tradition on my blog, I’ll update you with the details of an event about which you presumably care little.

I was sat on a train heading towards Hitchin from London King’s Cross after a night in Shepherd’s Bush at the War On Want Comedy Gig 2010. For several reasons, the topic of conversation between my friends and I had moved on to the merits of Stevenage.

When I say ‘merits’, of course I mean ‘lack of any remote trace of a morsel of a merit’. Stevenage is patently awful.

Consider the town centre, which seems somehow more befitting of Airstrip One (England in Nineteen Eighty-Four) than Hertfordshire. It is dominated by a clock of wince-inducing ugliness. Next to this is a fountain, which made gave the vicinity a potent smell of ‘eau de public swimming pool’. Nearby are some public toilets, the closer to which one gets, the more one starts to crave the miraculously more pleasant smell of the chlorine.

Elsewhere in the town are plenty o’ sixties tower blocks, and several estates where each house looks more or less identical. This is owing to the fact that Stevenage new town, of which I am talking, was built mostly after WWII on a large scale. Stevenage old town cannot, thankfully, be tarred with the same brush as it’s younger and more brutish brother.

A long walk around the new town gives one a feel of a large social experiment which plainly failed. It’s bizarre.

Anyhow, to return to the train conversation. I was unwisely critiquing Stevenage on a train which passed through Stevenage. Thus, people local to Stevenage were in nearby seats. My words were significantly less stinging than those written here, and were more balanced about the strange feel which a new town has. (That said, I may possibly have referred to it as hell, by stating that if hell turned out to be on Earth, it can only be Stevenage. The truth is that it’s more like purgatory).

I contrasted it favourably to Milton Keynes at least, which is a town of such ugliness that you might find yourself reaching for nearby rusty cutlery with which to gouge out your eyes and thus prevent you from witnessing its ugliness ever again.

I also noted the quite odd, but not bad, cycle lanes which you find around the city. They go over and under roads, meaning it should be easy to get from A to B with pedal power.

Following my balanced summary of the delights of Stevenage (okay, my tongue is currently in cheek), I noted to my comrades that I should have maybe considered that nearby persons might overhear and object to my verdict.

This last point proved as accurate as my ones about Stevenage’s ugliness – as a woman got up to leave the train, and angrily barked at me “have you ever lived in Stevenage?”. I said ‘no’, for I had not. I don’t remember what she said next, but she was presumably going to question the validity of my opinion as I had never resided there.

Before she left, she justified to a co-traveller of hers – “Sorry, I was just really offended by what I heard”.

I now offer a few points of response to the mystery angry female resident of Stevenage.

Are you seriously implying that you have to live somewhere to pass judgement on whether it looks nice or not? That is imbecilic.

Have you considered that you are angry because you live in Stevenage? I’d be angry.

If you’d have seen the sympathetic glances I received from fellow travellers, and a comment about your rudeness from one of them, you might consider that you had been more unreasonable than I.

I’m from Ipswich. I know what it’s like to hear people criticising a town which I love. It’s just others’ opinions on something inconsequential. It doesn’t matter. Let it go.

Even though I take great amusement in pretending that my own worthless opinions are in fact the most important proclamations of truth which a human ear would ever receive, I’m not so arrogant to think that people should share an opinion of mine about a place I have no attachment to.

As well as Ipswich, people often cite the ugliness of the University of York. Like Stevenage, if you’re not a fan of sixties architecture, you ain’t gonna like it. But I have personal attachments to the U of Y, and I love the place. But I don’t get annoyed if people describe it as hideous. I can reflect on it enough to see where they’re coming from.

But no, not mystery angry female resident of Stevenage (MAFRoS). MAFRoS simply descends into blind fury that someone’s opinion of her hometown could feasibly differ from her own.

Negative political campaigning in Cambridge: compare and contrast

Friday, March 19th, 2010

In the general election which is now just weeks away, I will be exercising my vote, and I will do so by voting for Tony Juniper’s campaign to become a Green Party MP for Cambridge.

One of the reasons I am fond of their outlook is that they try not to involve themselves with the negative and bitter style of politics which the other three main parties can seem intent on adopting. A brief viewing of Prime Minister’s Questions (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006nldz) will give an idea of what I am talking about.

It doesn’t seem unfair to suggest that the Punch and Judy style of politics, which is about smarmy jeering, remains too prevalent. I seem to remember David Cameron once pledging to move away from this (see penultimate paragraph of a Telegraph article of his in 2005), and it is sadly also filtering down to the campaigns of Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories in Cambridge.

A recent post from the Labour candidate, Daniel Zeichner, states “Lib Dems in chaos on Higher Education funding“. The conservative candidate, Nick Hillman, states “Lib Dem muddle over ‘backroom deals“. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems themselves, via their own candidate (Julian Huppert), opted to use that misleading graph about which I wrote my previous blog post.

It is possible to critique the policies or campaigns of other parties without resorting jibes like this, which come across as cheap. This is what the Green Party are uniquely trying to achieve during their campaign in Cambridge. To me, this is the kind of positive change that we really need to be voting for.

I hope other people join me in voting Green in Cambridge, and think that many will.

The Cambridge Lib Dems’ bitter campaign ought to alienate undecided voters

Friday, March 19th, 2010

When I got my hands on a local Lib Dem newsletter the other day, I could not help but feel profoundly disappointed.

In a prominent position, they opted to feature this graph:

The statistics used for this graph come from the 2005 election (available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/116.stm). Since 2005, the Green Party have understandably grown as a movement and as a serious voting option. Using a five-year old statistic does not seem a fair description of the current political outlook, especially in Cambridge.

After all, the election results in 2001 saw Labour command a 20% lead over the Liberal Democrats in the constituency. The Lib Dems in Cambridge, of all people, are aware of the political change which can occur within one term.

Perhaps the fact that they feel the need to publicly attack the Greens is telling in its own right. They must feel threatened. If the Greens can’t win, why didn’t the Lib Dems focus instead on the merits of their own policies? If the Greens literally cannot win, there is surely no point whatsoever in mentioning them.

Compare it with the graph demonstrating swing in the 2008 European elections for Cambridge. No bitter remarks here, simply a positive comment about the Green party gains. Nobody is ruling anyone out of future elections unnecessarily.

My inclination to vote for Tony Juniper and the Green Party has been reinforced by the Lib Dem move to perpetuate this negative style of politics. As a potential Lib Dem voter, I would have hoped that they would attempt to conduct a campaign in a fresher and more positive manner, but they sadly seem content to stick to the derogatory mode of campaigning preferred by the two main parties.

I feel yet more justified in my decision to vote Green in the upcoming election, because they simply want to run a clean campaign talking about their own merits.

Telling apart the homeless

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

I happened upon a quote today, which comes from the essayist and satirist H.L. Mencken, writing in the 1930s. Unbeknownst to me, the words “hobo”, “tramp” and “bum” are not interchangeable, for there exist subtle nuances which dictate which term is most apt for describing a given person of no fixed abode. I’ll let H.L. explain:

Tramps and hobos are commonly lumped together, but in their own sight they are sharply differentiated. A hobo or bo is simply a migratory laborer; he may take some longish holidays, but soon or late he returns to work. A tramp never works if it can be avoided; he simply travels. Lower than either is the bum, who neither works nor travels, save when impelled to motion by the police.

And there you have it. The difference between various states of homelessness.

Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem? None of the above, please.

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

With the general election merely weeks away, it’s about time everybody started reflecting on how the various political parties have behaved over the past few years, and who might serve them best for the next term in office.

In the first fortnight of the year, I wrote a few blog posts weighing up my options, as a disenfranchised socialist who would traditionally vote for Labour, but has felt let down by them – see ‘The Only Way‘, ‘Variations of the Same Thing‘ and ‘A Brief Assessment of the Current British Political Arena‘. After plenty of consideration, I am now sure where my vote will be placed, and it won’t be for any of the three ‘main parties’.

Despite the newly increased probability that a vote for Labour would prevent the horrors of a Conservative government, I cannot bring myself to do it. Giving my vote to Labour would unfortunately represent an endorsement of some values which I ought never possess: betrayal of one’s core principles, declaration of unnecessary war, and allowing inequality to become more prevalent still.

The ‘Labour’ name suggests a belief that the needs of the employee should be safeguarded from the wants of the employer. Yet, the Labour government persists in condemning strikes from workers in companies which pay ludicrously disproportionate salaries to their management, whilst the normal employee toils away with pay or conditions which ought to be better. It has been negative towards unions, despite union influence in funding the party themselves.

Meanwhile, it astounds me that war has been considered an acceptable way to resolve a problem in the 21st century. War is at best inefficient, and at worst entirely pointless. With every serious declaration of war, thousands upon thousands of lives will be terminated. Hearts will never beat again; limbs and organs of innocent civilians will be distributed metres from where they belong, courtesy of the nature of warfare. A terminal amount of innocent blood will be shed. It astounds me further that a Labour government deemed it unnecessary to ask the populace if we actually wished to have war declared in our name. It is sickening.

Inequality, meanwhile, will not go away. In light of how Labour has failed to tackle it, this is not surprising. Even after the ruin brought about from the selfishness of the city bankers, the government is failing to do anything which will curb their power, and prevent them from a continual mugging of the ordinary citizen. This too, is sickening.

The most gruesome point to emerge from this is that people are considering the Conservatives to be a better alternative. Their thinly-veiled hypocritical self-interest, which from time to time exposes itself as unashamed selfishness, demonstrates to me that they don’t have wider society’s interests at heart. Conservativism represents a desire to retain things as they are, or to hark back to better times. Society has never been sufficiently equal that this can be considered a remotely decent aim. The principles of Conservativism stand as a direct barrier to positive social change. To make society better, we will need to pioneer new reforms and strategies which have intended ends that deviate significantly from how things are now. To be Conservative is to aim to prevent this change from happening.

It is in the principles of the Conservatives to support war abroad, and to maintain inequality. By voting Conservative, we would be endorsing the kind of values which actively encourage fat cat bonuses, and selfish capitalisation on any situation which might earn you some money at the expense of others’ wellbeing. This, to me, is plainly a bad idea.

The Lib Dems meanwhile, are no better choice. Whilst the principles of Labour and the Conservatives are clear, it is hard to decipher any form of coherence in Liberal Democrat principles. Having dismissed a fair leader for being too old, they elected yet another party leader who wished to move into the overpopulated territory of the centre-right. Moreover, their part in the expenses crisis indicates that they are not, on the whole, any less selfish than those in the other two main parties. It’s very hard to contradict the notion that the Lib Dems do not simply adopt whichever policy will benefit them best at the time, as opposed to what is right for everyone.

That, I believe, explains why my vote will not be going to any of the three ‘main parties’. They simply do not deserve it. After much consideration, my vote will be going elsewhere. I will vote for a party who maintain policies I truly believe in, as opposed to any party which represents selfishness, weak compromises, and maintaining a mediocre status quo.

I’m going Green.